TRIAL CHAMBER II ("Trial Chamber") of the International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991 ("Tribunal");

BEING SEISED OF the "Defence Filing Pursuant to Scheduling Order" filed on 17 June 2005 and the "Second Defence Filing Pursuant to Scheduling Order" filed on 28 June 2005 ("Defence Filings") in which the Defence submits that it intends to call 73 witnesses during its case, and estimates a total length of time for examination-in-chief of these witnesses to be 249 hours;

NOTING that Rule 73ter of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the Tribunal ("Rules") provides for a Pre-Defence Conference which the Trial Chamber may hold prior to commencement by the Defence of its case;

NOTING that in preparation and for the purposes of the Pre-Defence Conference envisaged in Rule 73ter, the Trial Chamber requested the parties to attend a Rule 65 ter meeting under the chairmanship of its Senior Legal Officer;

NOTING that the Rule 65ter meeting was held on 30 June 2005, following which the Trial Chamber was informed by its Senior Legal Officer that the Defence was not prepared to renounce to any of the 73 witnesses as submitted in the Defence Filings;

NOTING the Trial Chamber’s obligations pursuant to Rule 73ter of the Rules which provides in pertinent part that:

"(…)

(C) In the light of the file submitted to the Trial Chamber by the pre-trial Judge pursuant to Rule 65ter(L)(ii), the Trial Chamber, having heard the defence, shall set the number of witnesses the defence may call.

(…)

(E) After having heard the defence, the Trial Chamber shall determine the time available to the defence for presenting evidence";

NOTING that the Trial Chamber held the Pre-Defence Conference on 1 July 2005, during which it heard submissions from the Defence on their reasons for not being ready to renounce to any of the 73 witnesses listed in the Defence Filings, as well as the remarks of the Prosecution.

NOTING, furthermore, that during the same Conference, the Trial Chamber gave detailed indications to the parties as to various areas of factual evidence which, in its opinion, it did not require any further evidence about, as well as its own assessment of how the number of Defence witnesses could be reduced and the remaining witnesses presented within a specified time-limit without endangering the Accused’s right to a fair trial;

NOTING that during the Pre-Defence Conference held on 1 July 2005, the Trial Chamber explained to the Parties that a written decision would follow;

CONSIDERING that, for the purposes of its obligations under Rule 73ter(C) and (E), the Trial Chamber has identified the following areas of evidence intended to be offered by Defence witnesses as having already been sufficiently addressed during the Prosecution case in a manner and to an extent which in the Trial Chamber’s opinion does not require any further evidence on the part of the Defence:

The historical and political background which led to the armed conflict in Bosnia-Herzegovina in April 1992;

The large number of attacks by Bosnian Serb forces on Bosnian Muslim villages within the geographical scope of the Indictment, including the wanton destruction and plunder of Bosnian Muslim villages and hamlets and the laying of mines by Bosnian Serb forces in and around destroyed Bosnian Muslim villages and hamlets;

The killing and inhumane treatment of Bosnian Muslims, whether civilians or non-civilians, by Bosnian Serbs or Bosnian Serb forces;

The policy of "ethnic cleansing" by Bosnian Serb political or military authorities before, during and after the crimes charged in the Indictment, in and around Srebrenica;

The positive treatment of Serbs – whether civilians or non-civilians, hostages or wounded, in Bosnian Muslim hospitals – by Bosnian Muslims, unless relating to persons identified in Counts 1 and 2 of the Indictment;

The situation of Srebrenica during the period relevant to the Indictment, namely the positioning of Bosnian Serb forces in and around Srebrenica, and the isolation of Srebrenica from the rest of Bosnia and Herzegovina while being under constant siege and suffering from air and artillery bombardment;

The influx of refugees in Srebrenica and the critical condition under which the population of Srebrenica had to live during the period relevant to the Indictment, to include food and medical shortages, hygiene issues, security concerns, sporadic electricity and telecommunications shortages;

The genocide committed against Bosnian Muslims in Srebrenica in 1995;

The military superiority of the Bosnian Serbs at the time relevant to the Indictment, namely that the Bosnian Serbs were better equipped militarily than the Bosnian Muslims and that, in addition, the Bosnian Serbs benefited from the support of the former JNA and from Serbia;

The Bosnian Muslim military capacity in Srebrenica was largely dependent on weapons that could be captured from the Bosnian Serb forces; and

The urgent necessity for the Bosnian Muslims to attack villages and hamlets named in the Indictment in order to try and secure food, medicine and weapons, for the purpose of the survival of the Muslim population in Srebrenica. (This limitation does not in any way mean that the Trial Chamber does not require any further evidence that the Defence may wish to adduce in relation to the aspect of military necessity to engage in wanton destruction as alleged in Counts 3 and 5 of the Indictment);

CONSIDERING that in view of the conclusions contained in the previous paragraph, which also take into account the fact that the Trial Chamber is allowing the testimony of Izet Redzic and Dr. Eric Dachy, the Trial Chamber has come to the conclusion that the Defence case can be concluded in the time-limit that is specified hereunder by the amount of witnesses that is being established, and that this decision secures, in the belief of the Trial Chamber, the best interests of justice and a fair trial for the Accused. The Trial Chamber has also tried to secure that there would not be any undue repetition of the same facts during the evidence by various witnesses;

FOR THE FOREGOING REASONS

PURSUANT TO Articles 20(1) and 21(2), (4)(b), (c) and (e) of the Statute of the Tribunal and to Rules 54 and 73ter(C), (E) and (F) of the Rules;

HEREBY ORDERS THAT:

During the Defence case, the Defence shall not address the areas of evidence identified above, except during the testimony of Defence witnesses Izet Redzic and Dr. Eric Dachy;

Pursuant to Rule 73ter(F) of the Rules, in the course of the Defence case, the Trial Chamber may grant any Defence request for additional time to present evidence if so required by the interests of justice, and in particular if the situation as regards the areas of evidence above, in the opinion of the Trial Chamber, changes in a way as to require further evidence.

The Defence case shall proceed as follows:

The Defence shall file a new witness list no later than 11 July 2005 reflecting a maximum of thirty witnesses;

The Defence shall conclude calling witnesses on 30 September 2005, with two exceptions:

Three additional days beyond 30 September 2005 shall be permitted for the Defence to present evidence, if it chooses, relating to the character of the Accused and the presence of any mitigating circumstances;

Any time lost during the Defence case which is for reasons beyond the control of the Defence shall be made up by allowing the Defence to continue their case into October for a period of time equal to the time lost.